- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:16755 WP No. 4331 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 4331 OF 2023 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: MR. MOHAMMED FAROOQ S/O. JALEEL MOHAMMED SINCE DECEASED REPRESENTED BY HIS LEGAL HEIRS 1. SMT. UMME KHAIR W/O. MOHAMMED FAROOQ AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS 2. MR. MOHAMMED TARIQ IMRAN S/O. MOHAMMED FAROOQ AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS 3. MR. MOHAMMED SIDDIQ IMRAN S/O MOHAMMED FAROOQ AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT, NO.219, KANAKADASA ROAD, ST.THOMAS TOWN, KACHARAKANAHALLI, BANGALORE-560084 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. RAJENDRA M A.,ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:16755 WP No. 4331 of 2023 AND: 1. THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION VIDHANA SOUDHA DR.B.R. AMBEDKAR ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001. 2. THE MALLESHWARAM CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. H.O# 102, 7TH CROSS, MALLESWARAM, BANGALORE-560003. REP. BY ITS MANAGER REGISTERED CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY ACT, 1949/1960 3. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER THE MALLESHWARAM CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. H.O# 102, 7TH CROSS, MALLESWARAM, BANGALORE-560003. …RESPONDENTS THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO RESTORE POSSESSION OF THE SECURED ASSET BY CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONERS BY CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER DTD 16.02.2023 ISSUED BY THE R-2 VIDE ANNX-G AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:16755 WP No. 4331 of 2023 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER Heard the learned counsel Sri.Rajendra M.A., appearing for the petitioner. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners would emphasise upon a solitary fact that the notice of possession was issued upon the dead person. The borrower died on 10.06.2021. The demand notice was issued on 11.06.2021 without being aware of the fact that the borrower had died. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would seek to project this circumstance to contend that the demand notice was issued on a dead person and every proceeding is taken up upon the said demand notice. Therefore, the entire proceeding is vitiated. This submission for the purpose of entertainment of the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is unacceptable. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:16755 WP No. 4331 of 2023 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he be reserved liberty to approach the Debt Recovery Tribunal upon the same cause of action and the period spent in this Court, in the subject petition be excluded for the purpose of consideration of the limitation. 5. In the light of the pendency of the proceedings before this Court, liberty is reserved to the petitioners to approach the Debt Recovery Tribunal on the same cause of action. All the conditions of both the parties are kept open. The period spent in this Court right from filing of the petition, till the petitioners would approach the DRT, be excluded for the purpose of consideration of limitation, if need so arises. The Debt Recovery Tribunal shall not insist on limitation, if the petitioners approach the DRT, within four weeks from today. In the event they would not approach within four weeks from today, it is open for the Tribunal to consider the issue on its merits and pass necessary orders, in accordance with law, even on limitation. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:16755 WP No. 4331 of 2023 6. With the aforesaid observations, the petition stands disposed. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE KG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 0